Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs vs Quadro M4000M

Place in the ranking	339	529
Place by popularity	not in top-100	73
Power efficiency	11.02	18.65
Architecture	Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)	Gen. 11 Ice Lake (2019−2022)
GPU code name	GM204	Tiger Lake Xe
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Laptop
Release date	18 August 2015 (9 years ago)	15 August 2020 (4 years ago)

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores	1,280	80
Core clock speed	975 MHz	400 MHz
Boost clock speed	1013 MHz	1350 MHz
Number of transistors	5,200 million	no data
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	100 Watt	28 Watt
Texture fill rate	78.00	no data
Floating-point processing power	2.496 TFLOPS	no data
ROPs	64	no data
TMUs	80	no data

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

Laptop size	large	no data
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	no data
Supplementary power connectors	None	no data

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory type	GDDR5	no data
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	no data
Memory bus width	256 Bit	no data
Memory clock speed	1253 MHz	no data
Memory bandwidth	160 GB/s	no data
Shared memory	-	+

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display Connectors	No outputs	no data
Display Port	1.2	no data

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Optimus	+	-
3D Vision Pro	+	no data
Mosaic	+	no data
nView Display Management	+	no data
Optimus	+	no data
Quick Sync	no data	+

API compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX	12	12_1
Shader Model	6.4	no data
OpenGL	4.5	no data
OpenCL	1.2	no data
Vulkan	+	-
CUDA	5.2	-

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.

Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

M4000M 15.97
+111%

Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs 7.57

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

M4000M 10259
+92.4%

Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs 5332

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

M4000M 7723
+92.6%

Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs 4010

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

M4000M 49204
+124%

Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs 21931

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD	75 +295%	19 −295%
1440p	21−24 +110%	10 −110%
4K	20 +33.3%	15 −33.3%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	27−30 +155%	11 −155%
Cyberpunk 2077	30−35 +121%	14 −121%
Elden Ring	45−50 +172%	18 −172%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	50−55 +117%	24−27 −117%
Counter-Strike 2	27−30 +211%	9 −211%
Cyberpunk 2077	30−35 +158%	12 −158%
Forza Horizon 4	65−70 +117%	30 −117%
Metro Exodus	40−45 +63%	27 −63%
Red Dead Redemption 2	35−40 +81%	21−24 −81%
Valorant	60−65 +256%	18 −256%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	50−55 +117%	24−27 −117%
Counter-Strike 2	27−30 +180%	10 −180%
Cyberpunk 2077	30−35 +520%	5 −520%
Dota 2	55−60 +159%	22 −159%
Elden Ring	45−50 +188%	17 −188%
Far Cry 5	55−60 +119%	26 −119%
Fortnite	85−90 +95.6%	45−50 −95.6%
Forza Horizon 4	65−70 +171%	24 −171%
Grand Theft Auto V	55−60 +338%	13 −338%
Metro Exodus	40−45 +159%	17 −159%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	110−120 +85.2%	60−65 −85.2%
Red Dead Redemption 2	35−40 +533%	6 −533%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	45−50 +113%	21−24 −113%
Valorant	60−65 +357%	14 −357%
World of Tanks	200−210 +75.7%	110−120 −75.7%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	50−55 +117%	24−27 −117%
Counter-Strike 2	27−30 +460%	5 −460%
Cyberpunk 2077	30−35 +675%	4 −675%
Dota 2	55−60 +58.3%	36 −58.3%
Far Cry 5	55−60 +72.7%	30−35 −72.7%
Forza Horizon 4	65−70 +225%	20 −225%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	110−120 +85.2%	60−65 −85.2%
Valorant	60−65 +156%	24−27 −156%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	24−27 +300%	6 −300%
Elden Ring	24−27 +150%	10−11 −150%
Grand Theft Auto V	24−27 +300%	6 −300%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	140−150 +270%	40−45 −270%
Red Dead Redemption 2	14−16 +133%	6−7 −133%
World of Tanks	110−120 +102%	55−60 −102%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	30−35 +129%	14−16 −129%
Counter-Strike 2	14−16 +40%	10−11 −40%
Cyberpunk 2077	12−14 +100%	6−7 −100%
Far Cry 5	40−45 +150%	16−18 −150%
Forza Horizon 4	35−40 +144%	16 −144%
Metro Exodus	35−40 +192%	12−14 −192%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	21−24 +110%	10 −110%
Valorant	40−45 +111%	18−20 −111%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	12−14 +1100%	1−2 −1100%
Dota 2	27−30 +55.6%	18−20 −55.6%
Elden Ring	10−12 +175%	4−5 −175%
Grand Theft Auto V	27−30 +50%	18−20 −50%
Metro Exodus	10−12 +267%	3−4 −267%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	45−50 +114%	21−24 −114%
Red Dead Redemption 2	10−11 +100%	5−6 −100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	27−30 +50%	18−20 −50%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	14−16 +150%	6−7 −150%
Counter-Strike 2	12−14 +1100%	1−2 −1100%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 +100%	2−3 −100%
Dota 2	27−30 +75%	16 −75%
Far Cry 5	20−22 +122%	9−10 −122%
Fortnite	18−20 +157%	7−8 −157%
Forza Horizon 4	21−24 +188%	8−9 −188%
Valorant	18−20 +157%	7−8 −157%

This is how M4000M and Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs compete in popular games:

M4000M is 295% faster in 1080p
M4000M is 110% faster in 1440p
M4000M is 33% faster in 4K

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

in Counter-Strike 2, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the M4000M is 1100% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

Without exception, M4000M surpassed Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs in all 63 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	15.97	7.57
Recency	18 August 2015	15 August 2020
Chip lithography	28 nm	10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	100 Watt	28 Watt

M4000M has a 111% higher aggregate performance score.

Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 4 years, a 180% more advanced lithography process, and 257.1% lower power consumption.

The Quadro M4000M is our recommended choice as it beats the Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro M4000M is a mobile workstation card while Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs is a mobile workstation one.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.